Bedroom dilemma

[soniiaa]

Me and DP are moving in together and we don’t know how to sort out the bedrooms. It’s a 4 bed house.

I have -
DS11 (is with me 90% of the time)
DD18 (is at uni but stays with me 100% of the holidays)

DP has -
DS16 (with him every weekend and every school holiday)
DS19 (with him ad hoc - maybe once or twice a week)

DP would ideally like his kids to have their own rooms, but then so would I. Maybe this is unreasonable with DD being at uni? Would really appreciate peoples thoughts!

Realistically, in roughly 3 years, this will have resolved itself because of the ages of the children.

So, in your position I would either wait 3 years to move in together. And then any child living permanently at home gets their own room. All other rooms are spare rooms, with the option to keep some of their stuff in a cupboard.

Or look carefully at 4 bed houses which can be stretched to make a 5 bed temporarily.

Something with a large master bedroom with an en-suite could work really well. You divide the room using a plasterboard wall which can be removed in a few years, effectively creating 2 small singles and a small corridor for one set of siblings.

Or find a 4 bed with an additional small reception room - playroom, study etc - and one of the 3 kids not living in the house has that.

As others have said you need a separate dining room downstairs to use as a bedroom. One of my neighbours does this for a similar reason to you.

Ah the classic parents putting their own needs ahead of their kids.

I know the kids are a bit older but surely they all should be considered enough in this arrangement to have their own safe spaces and not forced to share? If not, living arrangements are kept as they are until they leave home.

When DD first went to Uni, I was surprised by how much time she had off! The first term was 'normal' - except she came home for a month at Xmas, then a month at Easter, then finished in June before starting her 2nd year tenancy in Sep. So even though your DD is currently away, she def still needs a room to come back to.

if you can't afford a 5 bed, or a house with a convertible reception room, then you can't, there's no magical money tree. The fairest split will be your two having their own rooms and DPs two sharing a room on the odd occasion they are there at the same time. I would sweeten the deal by making that room the largest one, so they are still able to have their own space, whatever that is with a permanent stud wall or with creative Ikea style hacks.

I also think it would make sense to speak to the kids, they are old enough to understand your dilemma, and you may find that it doesn't bother them as much as it bothers you and DP.

To those questioning if Op and her partner have to live together, they have been together 7 years and are getting married. It's not a crazy selfish move in with a recent boyfriend.

They’ve waited 7 years, why not wait a bit longer? It is selfish because it’s not in their children’s best interests.

Two of their ‘children’ are adults who will not be living there full time. How much longer are they expected to wait? Of course it’s ideal if there are enough rooms for everyone but bankrupting themselves on a 5 bed they can’t afford or holding off on moving in together for an unspecified amount of time so that everyone can have a room on the off chance they want to stay over, is unrealistic.

The 11 and 16 year old obviously need their own rooms. The other room should be a guest room used by either of the older ones when they come back. If they are back at the same time then the two ds share. I really don’t think any adult child is going to be emotionally scarred by this.

What are they waiting for exactly ?

I think you haven’t understood the question.

To be able to live in a house which has bedrooms for all their dependent children from two homes which have bedrooms for all their dependent children.

Basically, they’re waiting for their children to grow up and move out before they downsize. A perfectly normal thing to do.

So they wait for an unspecified length of time just so that the 19 year old, who is only there one night a week, can have his own room ? Why not have him share with his younger brother, who would effectively have his own room the majority of the time ?

Two of the kids are grown up! They may always want to ‘come home’ for a night or two. They may split with a partner in later life and need a room. You can’t plan for every eventuality, you do the best with the space you have/can afford.

Op is only getting this much stick because it’s a blended family and by MN ridiculous standards you either stay with your dc father or you remain single. If you choose to have another relationship while your kids are still young (and even when they’re not) you are a selfish harlot who is prioritising cock (as one delightful poster wrote) and emotionally traumatising your kids. Yes blended families can be tricky, it doesn’t always work with everyone living together and the parents need to be aware of this and act in the kids best interests. In this case it sounds like they all get along and when two of them won’t even be living there the majority of the time (the 19 year old comes once a week and has a room at his mums ffs!) I really think some of these comments are over the top and meant purely to berate op on daring to date again.

A perfectly normal thing to do when you’re living together as a family, yes. But not when your relationship has already been on hold for seven years in the kids best interests. The perfectly obvious solution is that DPs two share the biggest room - the older ‘child’ is 19 and only there one night a week, so the younger child effectively has his own room six days a week.

I don’t get all the hand wringing and worrying about emotional damage. No-one is being asked to leave, just to find a compromise to allow the parents to be together. Two of the children are adults so old enough to understand. How long is long enough - when they’re 30, 40 ? I get the feeling more and more that the objections here are purely because it’s a blended family. In any other situation the replies would have been very different.

How is it “on hold”?
They’re getting married. He has “raised” OP’s son.
They have to sleep apart for two nights a week for a few more years. It’s not a big deal.

When they have their own homes then of course they don’t need their own bedrooms at their parents’ houses.
They will be visiting, not “going home”.

That’s the very clear and simple difference.

If it is their HOME they need a bedroom.

You’re suggesting that the actual owners of the house - the ones responsible for the mortgage and bills ‘hot room’. There’ve been some daft suggestions throughout the thread but this one takes first prize. Punishing mum and dad for daring to want to be together. Apportioning blame is going to create a great atmosphere for them all to live in isn’t it ?

And they’ve all got one. No one is being excluded. An adult of 19 should be able to understand and accept that it isn’t realistic to allocate a room for the exclusive use of one person for one night a week. He shares the biggest room with his brother, who effectively has his own room six days a week. Everyone is sorted.

Her husband is not willing to have them share. So that’s not going to happen

The 19 year old is there one day a week, his primary home is at his mother’s house. Are you really suggesting they put their lives on hold after a seven year relationship and impending marriage until the dc decide they don’t want to stay over anymore?

Kids share rooms. It’s how families work. I know people will bleat on about how the kids aren’t related therefore strangers but the op has said this isn’t the case and they all get along. I’m fairly sure a sensible 19 year old would understand the logistics of the situation.

Neither is DPs two sharing a room for one night a week. The suggestion that this is so unacceptable that OP and her DP should stay apart for an unspecified period of time is batshit. What exactly are they waiting for ?

With her mother and when she comes back she will have the guest room to herself.

I’m not the one who is unwilling for them to share. Their father is.

Sorry. I edited my post because I replied to the wrong post.

Exactly. If this wasn’t a blended family the suggestions would be very different. Rather than take the obvious option of DPs two sharing, let’s punish the parents for daring to move on with their lives. It’s asinine.

Who do you think is stipulating that his children can’t share?

HE is.